Letter: Duty vs. Conviction

Talk about it

To the Editor:

I continue to try to understand the forces that have controlled our political process for the past six decades. The title of this piece, “Duty vs. Conviction,” poses a question all mindful, educated voters may wish to consider. The question, “What is more important to you: Duty to a given party or conviction to a candidate, for other reasons than endorsements, who represents your values and positions?”

A political party is a wonderful tool to establish common ideas and lift up a candidate to whom party members feel will best represent the collective unit. However, it is run by the few; the few who place themselves as the controlling forces in a party (even prior to precinct caucuses) who eventually provide the voter with a candidate you are “duty bound” to vote for.

I understand this process is business as usual for the most political parties but I must take issue with those accusatory assumptions that take into question my loyalty to a party simply because I do not support an endorsed candidate. Believe me, if I believe there is a better individual running as an “unendorsed” candidate who has more public leadership experience, has volunteered time and talent to serve the community, and has proven himself or herself to be a force for positive change for our new District 11A, that person has my vote – regardless of endorsements.

There are two major primary contests this election cycle, the 8th Congressional seat and the open Minnesota 11A House District seat. We must carefully examine all of our options before the primary date of Aug. 14 and you may just find yourself surprised where your convictions rest; I know I was.

Cheri Manderfeld, Cloquet

Tags: letters to the editor, election, opinion